Claim: Nations should suspend government funding for the arts when significant numbers of their citizens are hungry or unemployed.

A standout among the effective government critical paradigm is its ability to meet basic needs of people. The government monetary judiciousness and the allotment of cash and assets are viewed as essential elements in determining and improving the government. As long as the citizens rudimentary needs such as job, food, shelter are provided by government, the people's interests are served. Therefore to the extent I concern, I concur to the authors claim of suspending the funding of arts, approved by the government, when presumptuous number of people are hungry and employed.

As a matter of first importance, even if the nation permits the funding of arts, it won' generate any revenue. Since majority of the citizens are afflicted with unemployment and dearth of food, it is unlikely that they will spend money on luxurious things such as going for movies, Broadway scores, opera musicals etc. There is more probability of them spending money on useful day to day items such as spices, bread,milk,etc. Thus funding arts in countries which is not economically developed is not a appropriate recommendation.

Secondly instead of funding arts, the government's priority should be to build economical and financial models to support the needy people without exploiting them. Franklin Roosevelt took the office at the height of great depression and begin to demand Congress that they institute programs which will enable an expeditious nation's recovery. The New Deal was born and spawned such programs as the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Tennesse Valley, and the Works Progress Administration. All these provided jobs to the Americans who would have otherwise spend their time standing in the breadlines or sleeping on the sleep. This act of Roosevelt proves that emphasizing on basic needs of people is more important than funding of arts or other secondly needs.

Thirdly art does not classify as a basic need of people. It might be tempting to say that art , by large is funded by private and charity organizations to uplift the new artists and to promulgate art in rural area. This spares the government with the money to develop and execute programs which would serve as a yardstick to improve the quality life of people. Once this basic stage is achieved, then the citizens themselves can buy not only art but also other luxuries of life. This in turn will significantly improve the economy of the country.

In conclusion, taking the arts into consideration as a significant factor in order to devote budget depends on nation’s circumstances. When people would not be able to make a standard living and have to involve with economical problems, their government should consider general welfare of all people and spend the majority of budget on providing people’s demands.